News and citizen. [volume] (Morrisville, Vt. ;) 1881-current, 1887-02-03
A LEGAL QUESTION.
Liability for Losses of Sheep by Dogs.

Not only is the owner of dog liable
for its acts, but any one who harbOrs it
or allows it upon his premises is also
liable. But a person is not respo nsible
for the acts of dog which he tries to
drive away from his premises, or for
those of a dog allowed TO remain tenn
porarily there, as in ting case of one who
keeps boarderg and alljTs them f. keep
dog on the Premises 3Rut in that case
the owner of The dog is1iable. The laws
with regard to liability for injury done
by dogs to sheep vary considera ly In
the different states. In Vermont, New
York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ohio,
California, Tennessee, Alabama, Mime
sofa, Oregon, Illinois, New Jersey and
Mississippi the statutes expressly pro
videthat any person may kill q dog
found worrying or injurin9 sheep. In
Michigan any person may without rend-
ering himself liable to civil or criminal
action, kill a dog he may see chasing,
worrying, wounding, or killing sheep,
s inc, cattle. or any other domestic an
imal. In Maryland the owner of a dog
is exempted from liability for sheep
killed, if he kills the dog Immediately
on receiving notice of injury, but if he
fails to do so, the owner of the sheep
may kill the dog and recover double
damages. In New Hampshire and Mas
sachusetts the owner of any domestic
animal, and in Wisconsin the owner of
any sheep or lambs, may recover from
the town for any injury inflicted by
dog. If he chooses, the owner of the
injured animal may sue the owner of the
dog, instead of claiming damages from
the town; but if he prefers to prove his
loss to the town supervisors, and accepts
an order on the town treasurer for the
amount, the claim is transferred to the
town, which may recover against the
owner of the dog; but the owner of
the sheep cannot thereafter recover
against him. In Rhode Island the first
time aldog worries a sheep the owner
can recover damages from the person who
harbors or owns the dog. If after the
first notice the dog is still allowed to
live, and Injuries sheep again, his owner
is liable for double damages, and the
court may order the animal killed. In
Alabama, Ca ifornia, Vermont, and Wis.
consin double damages can also be re-
covered. In Connecticut whoever has
lost by dogs worrying or killing his
sheep must give notice to the town
selectmen, and these may sue the owner
or harborer of the offending dog, and
unless the sheep owner is reimbursed by
the suit, the town becomes liable for the
damages. To provide a fund to meet
this liability, dogs are licensed, and the
license fees are held to meet such
claims.
When several dogs belonging to diff
ferent owners unite in committing mis-
chief, at common law, each owner is
liable only for the acts of his own ami
NAL. There would naturally be consid.
cradle difficulty IN ascertajning the ex-
tent of the injury done by each dog, but
the jury can adopt any reasonable rule
for ascertaining the damages. If the an
imals are of unequal size, and have diff
ferent capacities for mischief the iury
may take into onsideration the DAMAGE
done by each in approximating the LA
bilities Of the owners. By statute how
ever, in Connecticut, Vermont and Ohio.
the several owners of dogs that unite in
mischief, are jointly liable therefor;
while in Pennsylvania, each owner is Ii
able for the whole injury in the doing of
which his dog was jointly engaged. -
Raral NelO Yorker.